Makes a bit of a mockery of the suspension rules in place.
After the last round, even if the appeal fails, he'll still have driven all rounds and it won't change any of the title results.
But imagine the scenario of Cook clashing with Turkington (for example) in R1 and ruining a weekend. Would WSR appeal?

Warren Scott has done things in the past to upset Gow, I'm sure he won't be impressed with this action. And the BMR/888 stable now have a car on the grid to support Sutton that shouldn't be there.

Makes a bit of a mockery of the suspension rules in place.
After the last round, even if the appeal fails, he'll still have driven all rounds and it won't change any of the title results.
But imagine the scenario of Cook clashing with Turkington (for example) in R1 and ruining a weekend. Would WSR appeal?

Warren Scott has done things in the past to upset Gow, I'm sure he won't be impressed with this action. And the BMR/888 stable now have a car on the grid to support Sutton that shouldn't be there.

I just want to say that this thing about Scott upsetting Gow, would you care to elaborate?

It goes back to BMR's claims about engine boost and the homologation of part of the fuel delivery system. TOCA released a public clarification and rebuttal of BMR which included statement from Gow that he was 'disappointed'.

Obviously not, but we are in a position where Cook has picked up 4 disciplinary events leading to suspension. And the first appeal has already failed. In taking it to a further appeal, it gives the message that the team don't respect the series officials' decision (both initial and subsequent).

The appeal may be upheld, but I wonder how genuinely BMR believe that, and how much of it is to get the car on the grid through stalling tactics?

I find it strange that a team would risk a potential 6 race disqualification for the sake of 1 result that would likely be forgotten in time, unless there is another potential reward factoring into their risk/reward analysis of taking this action?

Obviously not, but we are in a position where Cook has picked up 4 disciplinary events leading to suspension. And the first appeal has already failed. In taking it to a further appeal, it gives the message that the team don't respect the series officials' decision (both initial and subsequent).

The appeal may be upheld, but I wonder how genuinely BMR believe that, and how much of it is to get the car on the grid through stalling tactics?

I find it strange that a team would risk a potential 6 race disqualification for the sake of 1 result that would likely be forgotten in time, unless there is another potential reward factoring into their risk/reward analysis of taking this action?

MSA Blue Book
7.1.3. The following are the only grounds for lodging an
Appeal against the decision of the Stewards of the
Meeting or the Stewards of a Championship:
(a) A gross miscarriage of justice has occurred
(b) The penalty is wholly inappropriate for the breach
of regulations.

888 are either saying that BARC and/or the Stewards have committed a gross miscarriage of justice or that they don't agree with the regulations/penalties that they were aware of when they joined the championship.

888 have 10 days to confirm the notice of intention to appeal the stewards decision, the MSA then have 10 days to confirm the national court will hear the appeal. 888 then have no less than 10 days to submit their skeleton arguments, adding that up it could take 30 days to hear the appeal.

I think if Cook has a poor race 1 and fails to score any points then 888 could withdraw the appeal to the national court. Cook will then be disqualified from the race 1 results, and therefore effectively serve the 1 race ban.

EDITED:I have just found this in the MSA Blue Book which as I read must mean that Cook cannot still take part in Race 1, is this correct?

7.3. Effect of Giving Notice of Appeal.
7.3.1. The lodging of an Appeal against a decision of
the Clerk of the Course, or the giving of Notice of
Intention to Appeal against a decision of the Stewards
of the Meeting, does not suspend any penalty that may
have been applied or endorsed, during the Meeting out
of which the decision has arisen. Thus no Competitor
may continue to compete ‘under appeal’.

I wonder what action TOCA could take against 888/BMR if the appeal failed, could Gow refuse to accept the entries to the 2018 championship from either 888 or BMR as a way of slapping them on the wrist, I am sure Gow has spare teams looking to enter the championship.